The New York Times Editorial

The Vergara v. California â€śruling opens a new chapter in the equal education struggle. It also underscores a shameful problem that has cast a long shadow over the lives of children, not just in California but in the rest of the country as well.â€ť

Vergara Plaintiffs Deliver Riveting Closing Arguments

Oakland Alliance of Black Educators Endorses Vergara

"We believe the spirit of dedication and making children the priority, as exhibited by educators like Marcus Foster, are necessary ingredients to effectively steward our most precious resource â€“ children."

Historic Victory for Students in VergaraÂ v. California

Court Strikes Down Five Provisions Of The California Education Code As Unconstitutional

On August 28, 2014, the California Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles made final its historic decision in Vergara v. California, striking down five harmful provisions of the California Education Code as unconstitutional. According to the Court, the laws in questionâ€”laws that govern teacher tenure, dismissal, and layoffsâ€”impose substantial harm on Californiaâ€™s students by forcing administrators to push passionate, inspiring teachers out of the school system and keep grossly ineffective teachers in front of students year after year.

â€ś…Plaintiffs have met their burden of proof on all issues presented.” (p. 3:26-27)

â€śAll sides to this litigation agree that competent teachers are a critical, if not the most important, component of success of a childâ€™s in-school education experience. All sides also agree that grossly ineffective teachers substantially undermine the ability of that child to succeed in school.â€ť (p. 7:13-17)

â€śEvidence has been elicited in this trial of the specific effect of grossly ineffective teachers on students. The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.” (p. 7:19-21)

â€śThere is also no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms.â€ť (p. 8:1-3)

â€śThis court finds that both students and teachers are unfairly, unnecessarily, and for no legally cognizable reason (let alone a compelling one), disadvantaged by the current Permanent Employment Statute.â€ť (p. 10:7-9)

“This Court heard no evidence that a classified employeeâ€™s dismissal process (i.e., a Skelly hearing) violated due process. Why, then, the need for the current torturous process required by the Dismissal Statues for teacher dismissals, which has been decried by both plaintiff and defense witnesses?” (p. 12:15-19)

â€śThis Court is confident that the independent judiciary of this state is no less dedicated to the protection of reasonable due process rights of teachers than it is of protecting the rights of childrenâ€¦â€ť (p. 12:23-26)

“While these cases [(Brown, Serrano I, Serrano II, and Butt)] addressed the issue of a lack of equality of education…, here this Court is directly faced with issues that compel it to apply these constitutional principles to the quality of the educational experience.” (p. 3:5-9)

“That this Court’s decision will and should result in political discourse is beyond question but such consequence cannot and does not detract from its obligation to consider only the evidence and law in making its decision.” (p.2:23-27)

The Court ordered a stay on the decision, pending appeal.

We’ve provided the following resources to offer more information about the Court’s decision and what it means for the future of public education:

Plaintiff Julia Macias, with her family, Students Matter advisory board member Russlynn Ali and Students Matter founder Dave Welch, addresses media outside the courthouse on the day of the Court’s ruling in Vergara v. California. Source: Monica Almeida/The New York Times